|
|
Post by Fason on Sept 27, 2022 21:44:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Fason on Sept 27, 2022 22:00:12 GMT -5
I hope we’d stop with the fines or at least temporarily suspend them on a trial run. Quit punishing GMs and causing the banker more work. We can keep posting the errors in a separate thread but don’t take currency.
Trofie suggested killing the 5 mil extensions with the MLE and LLE. Players will go back into the FA pool next offseason rather than extended to a cheap deal for two more seasons.
This has been mentioned plenty of times before, upping the reward for missing the playoffs so teams that are rebuilding or bad can somewhat make up the difference from what contenders get with box score rewards.
|
|
killiam bing
New Orleans Jazz
Posts: 777
Likes: 232
Joined: March 2022
|
Post by killiam bing on Sept 28, 2022 6:09:58 GMT -5
its simple: eric has a random "adjustment" to each rating. make that bigger. Out of 60 nonprofile guys its bound to make a couple of them interesting, randomly, which is good.
of course there are more complicated ideas like "make eric build players according to profiles" but hey i think we are past that at this point
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 28, 2022 8:28:15 GMT -5
I hope we’d stop with the fines or at least temporarily suspend them on a trial run. Quit punishing GMs and causing the banker more work. We can keep posting the errors in a separate thread but don’t take currency. Trofie suggested killing the 5 mil extensions with the MLE and LLE. Players will go back into the FA pool next offseason rather than extended to a cheap deal for two more seasons. This has been mentioned plenty of times before, upping the reward for missing the playoffs so teams that are rebuilding or bad can somewhat make up the difference from what contenders get with box score rewards. if you want teams that are rebuilding or bad to catch up with contenders, you want to keep the 5m- extensions because rebuilding teams can use them far more: a team over the cap can only get one mle, then they're bidding ~1m against 5m and will lose that every time |
|
|
|
Post by Trofie on Sept 28, 2022 8:40:38 GMT -5
I hope we’d stop with the fines or at least temporarily suspend them on a trial run. Quit punishing GMs and causing the banker more work. We can keep posting the errors in a separate thread but don’t take currency. Trofie suggested killing the 5 mil extensions with the MLE and LLE. Players will go back into the FA pool next offseason rather than extended to a cheap deal for two more seasons. This has been mentioned plenty of times before, upping the reward for missing the playoffs so teams that are rebuilding or bad can somewhat make up the difference from what contenders get with box score rewards. if you want teams that are rebuilding or bad to catch up with contenders, you want to keep the 5m- extensions because rebuilding teams can use them far more: a team over the cap can only get one mle, then they're bidding ~1m against 5m and will lose that every time A rebuilding team shouldn't be over cap though. |
|
|
|
Post by TinyTimPig on Sept 28, 2022 9:23:51 GMT -5
Can we start with a better acronym please?
Make Internet League Fun Again
|
|
|
|
Post by montrealdude on Sept 28, 2022 9:57:31 GMT -5
Live look at me doing sim league updates:
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 28, 2022 10:16:47 GMT -5
if you want teams that are rebuilding or bad to catch up with contenders, you want to keep the 5m- extensions because rebuilding teams can use them far more: a team over the cap can only get one mle, then they're bidding ~1m against 5m and will lose that every time A rebuilding team shouldn't be over cap though. this is my point - any contract $5m or less can be extended, so rebuilding / under cap teams can use $5m soft cap offers and extend those |
|
|
|
Post by Trofie on Sept 28, 2022 11:26:16 GMT -5
A rebuilding team shouldn't be over cap though. this is my point - any contract $5m or less can be extended, so rebuilding / under cap teams can use $5m soft cap offers and extend those This really isn't my thought process though. Funneling the MLE(or anyone that can receive the extension) players back into the FA pool helps rebuilding teams potentially sign them to long term deals. |
|
mazunga
Charlotte Hornets
Posts: 440
Likes: 176
Joined: January 2021
|
Post by mazunga on Sept 28, 2022 11:55:58 GMT -5
GET RID OF THE WHEEL
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 28, 2022 16:06:21 GMT -5
this is my point - any contract $5m or less can be extended, so rebuilding / under cap teams can use $5m soft cap offers and extend those This really isn't my thought process though. Funneling the MLE(or anyone that can receive the extension) players back into the FA pool helps rebuilding teams potentially sign them to long term deals. you're removing an advantage rebuilding teams definitely have to give them what you think will help, what evidence do we have that it would? the extensions aren't indefinite, who's the last one that went on to get big time money in FA? if that hardly ever happens, surely we can agree that putting more in won't turn out to be a help to rebuilding teams |
|
|
|
Post by Trofie on Sept 28, 2022 17:06:27 GMT -5
This really isn't my thought process though. Funneling the MLE(or anyone that can receive the extension) players back into the FA pool helps rebuilding teams potentially sign them to long term deals. you're removing an advantage rebuilding teams definitely have to give them what you think will help, what evidence do we have that it would? the extensions aren't indefinite, who's the last one that went on to get big time money in FA? if that hardly ever happens, surely we can agree that putting more in won't turn out to be a help to rebuilding teams I don't feel like you comprehend what I'm saying. |
|
|
|
Post by Druce on Sept 28, 2022 17:11:33 GMT -5
Lower maximum starting potential to 70 and make players not so reliant on rng get rid of cookie cutter builds that are +/- 5 in certain categories from others with that strength post tc audit to cap anyone at 75 shot blocking Cap inside scoring upgrades at 85 for non-bigs with a hard post tc cap of 90 minimum of 60 passing and 60 handling for point guards |
|
|
|
Post by rw on Sept 28, 2022 19:53:21 GMT -5
I feel like this is a shot at me
|
|
|
|
Post by rw on Sept 28, 2022 19:53:48 GMT -5
Please, this: minimum of 60 passing and 60 handling for point guards
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 28, 2022 23:22:30 GMT -5
Lower maximum starting potential to 70 and make players not so reliant on rng get rid of cookie cutter builds that are +/- 5 in certain categories from others with that strength post tc audit to cap anyone at 75 shot blocking Cap inside scoring upgrades at 85 for non-bigs with a hard post tc cap of 90 minimum of 60 passing and 60 handling for point guards the last three classes who are off their rookie deals have a best player who started at 75 or lower potential what evidence do we have that players are reliant on rng? |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 28, 2022 23:28:51 GMT -5
you're removing an advantage rebuilding teams definitely have to give them what you think will help, what evidence do we have that it would? the extensions aren't indefinite, who's the last one that went on to get big time money in FA? if that hardly ever happens, surely we can agree that putting more in won't turn out to be a help to rebuilding teams I don't feel like you comprehend what I'm saying. i feel like you're saying that you believe if we get rid of $5m- extensions it will help rebuilding teams and i'm saying you haven't thought it all the way through, for the reasons i've stated, and if you can engage with those specific reasons you can see why |
|
|
|
Post by Trofie on Sept 29, 2022 4:44:45 GMT -5
I don't feel like you comprehend what I'm saying. i feel like you're saying that you believe if we get rid of $5m- extensions it will help rebuilding teams and i'm saying you haven't thought it all the way through, for the reasons i've stated, and if you can engage with those specific reasons you can see why  |
|
killiam bing
New Orleans Jazz
Posts: 777
Likes: 232
Joined: March 2022
|
Post by killiam bing on Sept 29, 2022 7:50:54 GMT -5
Lower maximum starting potential to 70 and make players not so reliant on rng get rid of cookie cutter builds that are +/- 5 in certain categories from others with that strength post tc audit to cap anyone at 75 shot blocking Cap inside scoring upgrades at 85 for non-bigs with a hard post tc cap of 90 minimum of 60 passing and 60 handling for point guards the last three classes who are off their rookie deals have a best player who started at 75 or lower potential what evidence do we have that players are reliant on rng?
i love how eric is just full on trolling now, as if he hasn't made the argument that its all reliant on TC for the last 5 IRL years
|
|
killiam bing
New Orleans Jazz
Posts: 777
Likes: 232
Joined: March 2022
|
Post by killiam bing on Sept 29, 2022 7:52:23 GMT -5
I don't feel like you comprehend what I'm saying. i feel like you're saying that you believe if we get rid of $5m- extensions it will help rebuilding teams and i'm saying you haven't thought it all the way through, for the reasons i've stated, and if you can engage with those specific reasons you can see why
I mean your approach doesn't make much sense either. Are teams with tons of cap space offering a ton of 1 year 5m dollar deals with the intent to extend them if they end up good? Or, like most players entering free agency, you already know if they are decent or not and would just offer them the longer term deal trofie is talking about upfront.
Your point is niche and of arguably little value to any team below the cap
|
|
|
|
Post by Trofie on Sept 29, 2022 8:42:45 GMT -5
i feel like you're saying that you believe if we get rid of $5m- extensions it will help rebuilding teams and i'm saying you haven't thought it all the way through, for the reasons i've stated, and if you can engage with those specific reasons you can see why
I mean your approach doesn't make much sense either. Are teams with tons of cap space offering a ton of 1 year 5m dollar deals with the intent to extend them if they end up good? Or, like most players entering free agency, you already know if they are decent or not and would just offer them the longer term deal trofie is talking about upfront.
Your point is niche and of arguably little value to any team below the cap
this and I thought the whole point of this new "movement" was to get more players into FA, otherwise what the fuck was the point of the 1 max resign ruling? |
|
|
|
Post by Trofie on Sept 29, 2022 8:42:55 GMT -5
Excuse my french
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 29, 2022 12:32:51 GMT -5
the last three classes who are off their rookie deals have a best player who started at 75 or lower potential what evidence do we have that players are reliant on rng? i love how eric is just full on trolling now, as if he hasn't made the argument that its all reliant on TC for the last 5 IRL years
with 5 irl years to pull from it should be easy for you to quote one instance I mean your approach doesn't make much sense either. Are teams with tons of cap space offering a ton of 1 year 5m dollar deals with the intent to extend them if they end up good? Or, like most players entering free agency, you already know if they are decent or not and would just offer them the longer term deal trofie is talking about upfront.
Your point is niche and of arguably little value to any team below the cap we're not talking about the most players people are just offering the longer term deal upfront, we're talking about the few players who get signed for mle and lower and extended the absolute value extensions offer to a team below the cap is irrelevant to my point, which is that that value is larger than the value it offers to a team above the cap - if something is worth $0.05 to you and $0.01 to someone else, it's still worth more to you even though it's almost worthless |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 29, 2022 12:38:14 GMT -5
I mean your approach doesn't make much sense either. Are teams with tons of cap space offering a ton of 1 year 5m dollar deals with the intent to extend them if they end up good? Or, like most players entering free agency, you already know if they are decent or not and would just offer them the longer term deal trofie is talking about upfront.
Your point is niche and of arguably little value to any team below the cap
this and I thought the whole point of this new "movement" was to get more players into FA, otherwise what the fuck was the point of the 1 max resign ruling? i don't know whom you are quoting or to what movement you're referring. the point of the max resign ruling was that odin brought up the idea of reducing resignings, i think it's a positive change, and it was broadly tolerable to the league. i don't have grand sweeping schemes, for me it's really just about looking each change and tediously nailing down the details and implications of it. it's not personal, it's not exciting, it's just nuts and bolts |
|
|
|
Post by Druce on Sept 29, 2022 15:09:28 GMT -5
Lower maximum starting potential to 70 and make players not so reliant on rng get rid of cookie cutter builds that are +/- 5 in certain categories from others with that strength post tc audit to cap anyone at 75 shot blocking Cap inside scoring upgrades at 85 for non-bigs with a hard post tc cap of 90 minimum of 60 passing and 60 handling for point guards the last three classes who are off their rookie deals have a best player who started at 75 or lower potential what evidence do we have that players are reliant on rng? as much as i'd love to just pluck the best player from every class for my team, thats not what im talking about. you also cherry picked one thing out of five i posted to address half heartedly. taking such a hard line stance when it's clear interest is waning league wide is an odd strategy. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Sept 29, 2022 16:53:48 GMT -5
the last three classes who are off their rookie deals have a best player who started at 75 or lower potential what evidence do we have that players are reliant on rng? as much as i'd love to just pluck the best player from every class for my team, thats not what im talking about. you also cherry picked one thing out of five i posted to address half heartedly. taking such a hard line stance when it's clear interest is waning league wide is an odd strategy. i responded to the one observation you made about the league as it exists. since you don't want to talk about the best players disproving that observation, let's look at the entire classes for those three years: .117 ws/48 has been collectively produced by the profile players who started with 90 potential, .104 ws/48 by those who started with 75 potential, and .109 ws/48 by those who started with 60 potential .103 ws/48 by the non profile players who started with 92 potential, .076 ws/48 by those who started with 77 potential, .056 ws/48 by those who started with 62 potential, and .077 ws/48 by those who started with 47 potential as you can see with your eyes, a second order function (better to have high or low potential than middle) fits this better than a first order linear function. even if we ignore that the fits are quite poor, therefore, the data for these classes as a whole still contradicts the "reliant on rng" hypothesis, and as a bonus proves that profiles as a whole are well ahead of non profiles at .110 to .074 we also don't see any evidence that GMs actually believe players are reliant on rng, because the most popular profile players by minutes started at 75 potential rather than 90, and the most popular non profile players by minutes started at 62 potential, and non profiles who started at 92 potential actually accrued the least minutes . i'm guessing you won't care about this either, so i'll ask again: what evidence do we have that players are reliant on rng? this does not ask for your assessment of the evidence i've provided, but for any evidence for what YOU believe since you bring it up, i do take a hard line on having a factual basis for the changes we make as opposed to hoping the louder a complaint is the more correct it is, and i have for the periods when the league population went up and when the league population went down. since there is therefore no correlation between my behavior and league population, it seems like it'd be more productive for you to just try to back up your claims on their own merits |
|
|
|
Post by Trofie on Sept 29, 2022 17:42:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Druce on Sept 29, 2022 20:29:43 GMT -5
as much as i'd love to just pluck the best player from every class for my team, thats not what im talking about. you also cherry picked one thing out of five i posted to address half heartedly. taking such a hard line stance when it's clear interest is waning league wide is an odd strategy. i responded to the one observation you made about the league as it exists. since you don't want to talk about the best players disproving that observation, let's look at the entire classes for those three years: .117 ws/48 has been collectively produced by the profile players who started with 90 potential, .104 ws/48 by those who started with 75 potential, and .109 ws/48 by those who started with 60 potential .103 ws/48 by the non profile players who started with 92 potential, .076 ws/48 by those who started with 77 potential, .056 ws/48 by those who started with 62 potential, and .077 ws/48 by those who started with 47 potential as you can see with your eyes, a second order function (better to have high or low potential than middle) fits this better than a first order linear function. even if we ignore that the fits are quite poor, therefore, the data for these classes as a whole still contradicts the "reliant on rng" hypothesis, and as a bonus proves that profiles as a whole are well ahead of non profiles at .110 to .074 we also don't see any evidence that GMs actually believe players are reliant on rng, because the most popular profile players by minutes started at 75 potential rather than 90, and the most popular non profile players by minutes started at 62 potential, and non profiles who started at 92 potential actually accrued the least minutes . i'm guessing you won't care about this either, so i'll ask again: what evidence do we have that players are reliant on rng? this does not ask for your assessment of the evidence i've provided, but for any evidence for what YOU believe since you bring it up, i do take a hard line on having a factual basis for the changes we make as opposed to hoping the louder a complaint is the more correct it is, and i have for the periods when the league population went up and when the league population went down. since there is therefore no correlation between my behavior and league population, it seems like it'd be more productive for you to just try to back up your claims on their own merits I don’t have the ability to run all of these numbers etc. This thread is for suggestions on how to make the league actually fun again, which is what I did. I would love to see a chart of the players and ranges that make up these averages to see the risk/reward associated with each potential. Would also like to see a more dynamic range of potentials given out rather than a static 3/4 numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by Dirt on Sept 30, 2022 7:38:36 GMT -5
Kill LeBron
|
|
killiam bing
New Orleans Jazz
Posts: 777
Likes: 232
Joined: March 2022
|
Post by killiam bing on Sept 30, 2022 7:47:49 GMT -5
i want to bring back random player deaths so bad
|
|
